刑事庭前会议程序实证研究

发布时间：2018-08-31 19:33

【摘要】：我国刑事庭前会议制度的确立,是司法程序改革的一项重要举措,是法院审判权行使方式的一次优化配置。刑事庭前会议程序为在庭审程序之前解决相关程序性争议,保障被告人及其辩护人的程序性权利,为庭审活动做好准备活动,从而保障庭审活动集中高效地处理被告人定罪量刑的问题提供了一个平台。作为一项会议程序,其可以搭载不同的程序,发挥不同的功能。由于我国法律对于刑事庭前会议程序的内容并没有明确的规定,使得刑事庭前会议程序与其他刑事诉讼程序的关系比较混乱,特别是在功能设置上与其他程序出现交叉。在具体适用刑事庭前会议程序中又会出现代替庭审程序处理实质性争议的问题。如此,设置刑事庭前会议程序,保障庭审程序集中高效进行的初衷就难以实现。本文通过对我国法律相关规定以及域外类似程序的考察分析,明确我国刑事庭前会议程序的内容,在此基础上明确我国刑事庭前会议程序应当具有的功能。同时对我国有关刑事庭前会议的制度建设情况及操作中的问题进行分析,尝试提出解决这些问题的建议,使我国刑事庭前会议程序真正的发挥作用,实现刑事诉讼程序的公正与效率。本文除引言和结语外,共分为三部分:第一部分,是对刑事庭前会议的理论界定。首先是明确刑事庭前会议程序的内容。通过对我国相关法律规定及域外类似程序的分析,明确刑事庭前会议程序属于庭前准备程序,具有庭前准备事项、程序协商、非法证据排除的听证三个内容。同时明确刑事庭前会议程序与庭前审查程序以及庭审程序的关系,从而避免互相之间的功能重合,将强制措施变更排除在刑事庭前会议程序之外。其次,在明确刑事庭前会议程序内容基础上,确定该程序应当具有的功能。主要包括案件繁简分流功能以及非法证据排除功能第二部分,是对刑事庭前会议制度建设及操作中的问题进行分析。首先,通过对我国刑事诉讼法及两高司法解释还有三个地方性适用办法进行总结分析,概括出我国刑事庭前会议制度建设的基本情况以及出现的问题。其次,通过对一个基层法院适用刑事庭前会议程序的情况进行调研,分析在具体操作过程中出现的问题及原因。总结我国刑事庭前会议制度,主要存在三个突出问题:庭前预断的出现;被告方权利缺失;应有功能缺失。这些问题既可能使得我国刑事庭前会议程序的功能难以发挥,又可能使得该程序的功能不当发挥,同时刑事庭前会议程序本身的公正难以实现。通过对上述问题产生的原因进行分析整理,总结为功能设置、程序设计两个方面。第三部分,是为我国刑事庭前会议制度的完善提出建议。根据前文对出现问题的原因总结,此部分将从功能设置、程序设计两部分展开。在功能设置上,既要确立刑事庭前会议程序的案件繁简分流功能,又要对不属于刑事庭前会议程序的功能予以排除,在立法上通过反向规定限制刑事庭前会议程序向定罪量刑实质性处理的不当扩张。在程序设计上,既要保障被告人的主体地位,赋予其庭前会议启动申请权和程序选择权,又要对主持法官的设置进行合理安排,同时明确刑事庭前会议程序应当产生什么结果,具备什么效力。
[Abstract]:The establishment of China's criminal pre-trial meeting system is an important measure in the reform of judicial procedure and an optimized allocation of the way in which the court exercises its jurisdiction. As a conference procedure, it can carry different procedures and play different functions. Because the content of the criminal pre-court meeting procedure is not clearly stipulated in the law of our country, the criminal pre-court meeting procedure and other criminal proceedings are made. The relationship between litigation procedure and other procedure is confused, especially in the function settings. Substantive disputes will be dealt with instead of trial procedure in the specific application of criminal pre-trial meeting procedure. Through the investigation and analysis of the relevant provisions of our country's law and the similar procedures abroad, the content of our country's criminal pretrial meeting procedure is clarified, and on this basis the functions that our country's criminal pretrial meeting procedure should have are clarified. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into three parts: the first part is the theoretical definition of the criminal pre-trial meeting. First, it is to clarify the content of the criminal pre-trial meeting procedure. The analysis of legal provisions and extraterritorial similar procedures makes it clear that the criminal pretrial meeting procedure belongs to the pretrial preparation procedure, and has three contents: pretrial preparation, procedural consultation and hearing for the exclusion of illegal evidence. Secondly, on the basis of clarifying the contents of the criminal pre-court meeting procedure, the functions that the procedure should have are determined. The second part mainly includes the functions of simplifying cases and dividing illegal evidence. The second part is to divide the problems in the construction and operation of the criminal pre-court meeting system. First of all, through the summary and analysis of the Criminal Procedure Law of China and the two high judicial interpretations, the paper summarizes the basic situation and problems of the construction of China's criminal pre-court meeting system. Secondly, through the investigation and study of the application of criminal pre-court meeting procedure in the grass-roots courts, it analyzes the specific situation. Summarizing the problems and reasons in the process of operation, there are three prominent problems in China's criminal pre-court meeting system: the emergence of pre-judgment; the absence of the rights of the defendant; and the lack of due functions. These problems may not only make the functions of the criminal pre-court meeting procedure difficult to play, but also make the functions of the procedure improper to play. The third part is to put forward suggestions for the perfection of the criminal pre-court meeting system in our country. On the function setting, we should not only establish the function of simplifying and diverting cases, but also exclude the function that does not belong to the criminal pre-court meeting procedure, and restrict the improper expansion of the criminal pre-court meeting procedure to the substantive treatment of conviction and sentencing through the reverse regulation in legislation. We should not only protect the defendant's principal position, endow him with the right to apply for the initiation of the pre-trial meeting and the right to choose the procedure, but also make reasonable arrangements for the establishment of the presiding judge, and make clear what results the criminal pre-trial meeting procedure should produce and what effectiveness it has.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】